If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

A united EU military would be awesome. But that would require a common defense budget. Good luck with that.

No need even to go so far on the first step. Just have operational co-ordination between nations who have an absolute commitment to mutual non-aggression. That allows for specialisation, seamless co-ordination and a gigantic hissy fit from both the russians and the americans.

That is already happening. There are the Dutch-German and French-German Brigades, the Dutch HNLMS Karel Doorman can be used by Germany and the French and German air forces are jointly acquiring a bunch of Hercs to carry them over the retirement of the Transall and getting enough A400M delivered.

I wonder how they collected that data, then again Lark linked it so it's probably just made up

I think it was a gallup poll IIRC.

You'd have to wonder about sample sizes and locations. For example did they take their whole sample for China in the big cities or countryside? Did they ask anybody in Xinjiang or Tibet?

Also where the hell do the Japanese military find enough young recruits with an overall number as low as that?

Number for the U.S. also looks like they took too much of their sample on the coasts.

Also context is important.

I am sure that far more people would say that they'd fight for their country if their country was attacked by another power than would be prepared to fight in war number "x+1" somewhere in the world against some kind of terrorists for some vague reasons.

So much for no EU army, I guess Farage was right about that one. They really are plotting.

Originally Posted by Malcanis

That allows for specialisation, seamless co-ordination and a gigantic hissy fit from both the russians and the americans.

The Russians would welcome an EU Army because it would a) Break up/Conflict with NATO b) Not be equal among nations and c) Would never get anywhere.

Not to mention the fact that is a fucking awful idea.

Has the Guardian been sleeping? "Secret plan"? Having a united European military has been tossed around as an idea for decades. Since 1992 the Eurocorps exists, it has the Franco-German Brigade permanently attached to it. There is even an European Defense Agency promoting more collaboration.

The UK has for years blocked any further military cooperation among the EU members.

So much for no EU army, I guess Farage was right about that one. They really are plotting.

Originally Posted by Malcanis

That allows for specialisation, seamless co-ordination and a gigantic hissy fit from both the russians and the americans.

The Russians would welcome an EU Army because it would a) Break up/Conflict with NATO b) Not be equal among nations and c) Would never get anywhere.

Not to mention the fact that is a fucking awful idea.

"NATO", ie: the US, has recently made it very clear that Europe can no longer rely on the US. Blame this all on Trump if you like, but if they could elect one Trump, they could elect another. As no one EU country can defend itself against the current Russian military, the alternatives are:

(1) Accept Russian hegemony in place of the US (Deeply unattractive, especially to all the countries who just got the fuck out from that.)
(2) Every country within 300km of a Russian border unbalance their economy with massive military spending like the Russians (and there's no way that doing this could facilitate intra-Europe conflict, right?)
(3) Persuade Russia get over the loss of Empire and to concentrate on problems within its borders. Unfortunately the people that would need persuading are the problem.
(4) Form a European military organisation and make it work, because the alternatives are unacceptable.

A united EU military would be awesome. But that would require a common defense budget. Good luck with that.

and uniting military traditions dating back hundreds, and in some rare cases thousands of years back.

how about the EU sorts out how to resolve it's current fail-state, and then maybe we can talk further intigration, huh ?

Well military tradition is either modeled after French, Prussian or British traditions. Some are an amalgamation of all three. Shouldn't be too hard (and bring back some Prussian traditions we don't do anymore because the Nazis also did them )

you're up against cultural more than practical problems, something simple like language comes to mind, English is a obvious candidate, but not a desirable one, the French usually wont accept anything but French and that's a wonderful way to piss off the rest and the whole thing just goes down-hill from there.

i am not saying it can't work, it can as Eurocorps so amply prove but there are enormous barriers that needs to be addressed from the command-level all the way down, i shudder to think how joint procurement is even going to work, so many "substitute standards" getting grandfathered in and kept around, not to mention differences in tactical doctrine and national quirks such as the Scandinavian citizen militias and the list just goes on and on.

Originally Posted by Timaios

Originally Posted by Malcanis

Originally Posted by Joe Appleby

Originally Posted by Malcanis

2 pages of excellent reasons for European military integration.

Against: numptons who can't believe it's not still 1913

A united EU military would be awesome. But that would require a common defense budget. Good luck with that.

No need even to go so far on the first step. Just have operational co-ordination between nations who have an absolute commitment to mutual non-aggression. That allows for specialisation, seamless co-ordination and a gigantic hissy fit from both the russians and the americans.

Would be sweet but we have a problem of even getting that part done between Finland and Sweden although we are pretty committed to non-aggression outside of the ice hockey ring and the ferries between the countries.

But the Nordics should probably start with this. An issue is also that not all European countries are in the NATO, any coordination and streamlining would then have to be NATO synergy by default.

It isn't often democracies vote on a blank sheet of paper. If Brexit had been a vote on specific legislation detailing how and what leaving the EU looked you then perhaps you could form a coherent argument.

Originally Posted by Paul Mason

It is absurd that we are capable of witnessing a 40,000 year old system of gender oppression begin to dissolve before our eyes yet still see the abolition of a 200 year old economic system as an unrealistic utopia.

It isn't often democracies vote on a blank sheet of paper. If Brexit had been a vote on specific legislation detailing how and what leaving the EU looked you then perhaps you could form a coherent argument.

How many of those reserves would actually show up if they were called up though?

Someone posted this article in the board game thread. It's related as the reason for both is the same:

In North America, the complex board games created during the latter half of the 20th century typically took the form of simulated warfare. In Risk, Axis & Allies, Star Fleet Battles, and Victory in the Pacific, players take on the role of generals moving their units around tabletop maps. But for obvious reasons, this wasn’t a model that resonated positively with the generation of Germans who grew up in the shadow of the Third Reich. Which helps explain why all of the most popular Eurogames are based around building things—communities (Catan), civilizations (Terra Mystica), farms (Agricola)—rather than annihilating opponents. The result is a vastly more pacifist style of a game that can appeal to women as much as men, and to older adults as much as high-testosterone adolescents.